the point was that racial diversity has educational benefits that are substantial enough to make it a compelling interest that there is a compelling interest justifying the use of racial preference if necessary to get this kind of racial diversity. but kennedy dissented forcefully on the so-called narrow tailoring requirement. he's said that the university had failed to show that it had met a number of the principles that the majority had laid down and the majority had given far too much deference to the university claims. the principles are briefly at racial preference should not be resorted to until race-neutral alternatives have been exhausted to serve the interests of racial diversity, that racial balance is actually bart and i think the court means seeking to mayor the proportions of various racial groups in the population at large. internationally here in the state and also that racial preferences should not be perpetual. in fact the kate -- cordon kruetter said in 25 years we should expect this won't be necessary anymore and that is 28 and nine of these are gone. the logical ob